The Racing Games Comparison Thread (GT5 & FM3) *spawn

[swaaye]

You know what I liked least about Forza 2, aside from the lack of AA and craptastic filtering? The removal of the A->B hill climb races. And the lack of music during racing. Sure I suppose that's just not part of the "real" racing experience (like a video game is anything like that anyway?) I got bored pretty quick doing the usual circuits that I've been racing in games since like Gran Turismo 1.

I actually wish that we could get back to racing games with fantasy tracks like in the olden times NFS games.

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

The racing game comparison thread (GT5 compared with FM3) *spawn

About forza3 and GT5, i saw a bullshot comparison that caught my eye.

The person pointed out GT5 lacking shine on it's wheels and tires, lacking self shadowing underneath rear view mirror's and above the the front wheels, along with lacking realistic shadows underneath the vehicle. He also pointed out the differences in ground pavement and also pointed out the emblem on the side of GT5's car. (it's a texture)

After seeing all that for my self i was surprised. can anyone make a similar comparison?

 

[RudeCurve]

The GT5 shot looks weird, look at the front to rear rake angle. It also looks like a R/C car.

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

The GT5 shot looks weird, look at the front to rear rake angle. It also looks like a R/C car.

Yeah, the paint job in Forza3's car reflects with realistic attributes ( blue glare on front windshield and on front hood ) whereas GT5's car is mostly red with high gloss and with some dark areas up front. (you don't anything of the environment towards the back of the vehicle)

btw, I meant to say side view not "rear view mirror's" my mistake.

 

[Iron Tiger]

Lighting is different on both cars. The more intense lighting is coming from high and right in the GT shot, while the Forza shot has light coming in on the side. The side emblem stands in greater relief because of this, and is gleaming with specularity. GT5 cars don't really skimp on noticeable details like that, so I think we're just not seeing the embossing because of the lighting. You can clearly see it on the hood emblem, as well as the normal mapped punchouts on the bumper (which aren't present in the Forza shot).

The lack of apparent self-shadowing from the mirror could be explained by the lighting angle. There may be a shadow falling on the darker areas, and we just can't see it. I don't know why they wouldn't have self-shadowing in photo mode when they've got it in-game.

Low specularity on the rims? Lighting angle and depth of field. There's no DoF in the Forza shot, but you can see blurring on the rear portion of the car in the GT shot.

I hope nobody's getting seriously obsessive over this stuff. They're just photo modes, and this level of scrutiny is just nitpicking. In the GT5 thread people somebody's going to point out that there's no driver in the Forza car.

 

[RudeCurve]

The more intense lighting is coming from high and right in the GT shot.

There's no evidence that the light comes from the top right. It could very well be directly above. Anyway the GT5 pic just looks "fake", it looks like there's a lot of textures used to fake polys. For example look at the door panel gaps, they're just textures. On FM3 it looks like polys and probably is. Also look at the wheels in the GT5 shot, it looks like there some baked lighting there to fake reflections and the perspective looks wrong (shape of star). The DoF doesn't make it more real either just more cinematic. Bottom line, there's just more polys in the FM3 Ferrari.

 

[nightshade]

Had the lighting been from top side instead of top right you would have seen the shine in a different place.As for Polys you may as well count in the Driver's poly in GT5 shot compared to no driver in Forza 3 shot.

http://o.aolcdn.com/gd-media/games/gran-turismo-5-prologue/playstation-3/21.jpg

In this picture even the front emblem looks like a texture, while in the earlier picture posted above we have seen that it's polygons, similarly with Door Panel gaps, in this picture you can make out that they are made of polys & not textures. Its just the angle & lighting which made the difference.

 

[Crossbar]

There's no evidence that the light comes from the top right. It could very well be directly above. Anyway the GT5 pic just looks "fake", it looks like there's a lot of textures used to fake polys. For example look at the door panel gaps, they're just textures. On FM3 it looks like polys and probably is. Also look at the wheels in the GT5 shot, it looks like there some baked lighting there to fake reflections and the perspective looks wrong (shape of star). The DoF doesn't make it more real either just more cinematic. Bottom line, there's just more polys in the FM3 Ferrari.

How do you know it´s just tesselation at work?

And let me also note that I find comparing photomode shots incredibly stupid, it´s very much about personal opinions and bias. Personally I find the FM3 shot very bland and lifeless, but that´s just me and who are the people playing the game to make photomode shots anyways?

 

[nightshade]

Not everything is different in photomode...like the poly count for one remains the same, same for a few other stuffs.

 

[Crossbar]

Not everything is different in photomode...like the poly count for one remains the same, same for a few other stuffs.

How do you know they are not doing more extensive tesselation in photomode?

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

Lighting is different on both cars. The more intense lighting is coming from high and right in the GT shot, while the Forza shot has light coming in on the side. The side emblem stands in greater relief because of this, and is gleaming with specularity. GT5 cars don't really skimp on noticeable details like that, so I think we're just not seeing the embossing because of the lighting. You can clearly see it on the hood emblem, as well as the normal mapped punchouts on the bumper (which aren't present in the Forza shot).

The lack of apparent self-shadowing from the mirror could be explained by the lighting angle. There may be a shadow falling on the darker areas, and we just can't see it. I don't know why they wouldn't have self-shadowing in photo mode when they've got it in-game.

Low specularity on the rims? Lighting angle and depth of field. There's no DoF in the Forza shot, but you can see blurring on the rear portion of the car in the GT shot.

I hope nobody's getting seriously obsessive over this stuff. They're just photo modes, and this level of scrutiny is just nitpicking. In the GT5 thread people somebody's going to point out that there's no driver in the Forza car.

Well going by how depth of field is used in forza3 it's shown mostly in motion, but for all we know it could be a simple toggle adjustment like how PGR4's settings for photo mode.

http://www.gamersyde.com/pop_images_forza_motorsport_3-11134-10.html

About the "no person in the car" funny, yeah true people can just spend hrs nitpicking on one image. :smile:

However people have already shown comparison changes from the last forza, it seems people are already tired of that and beginning to want to show comparisons of different game engines, looking for the differences in both of them. (And the answer is yeah there will be differences, and that's what some people want, i'm sure even game reviewers are looking for differences. )

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

Had the lighting been from top side instead of top right you would have seen the shine in a different place.As for Polys you may as well count in the Driver's poly in GT5 shot compared to no driver in Forza 3 shot.

http://o.aolcdn.com/gd-media/games/gran-turismo-5-prologue/playstation-3/21.jpg

In this picture even the front emblem looks like a texture, while in the earlier picture posted above we have seen that it's polygons, similarly with Door Panel gaps, in this picture you can make out that they are made of polys & not textures. Its just the angle & lighting which made the difference.

Hmmmmm, looking at that shot there seems to be no self shadowing, and the rims seem to be glowing white in the dark. (where there should be darkness in that area)

 

[djskribbles]

Doesn't look white to me. The lip of the wheel is thicker than the spokes, and unlike the spokes, the lip looks the same while in motion, so when it's spinning at high speeds (like it is in the shot) the lip appears lighter in color relative to the spokes, which is normal for that style of wheel.

And judging by the placement of the shadow of the car, the light seems to be coming from high left so there's nothing that can really cause self-shadowing. I can you tell you right now that even GT5P has self-shadowing.

 

[Arwin]

I think Forza 3 has up to 400.000 polys in their car-models (based on what Turn10 themselves said). When rendering in photomode, they may well also use Tesselation, but with 400.000 polys they may not need to. We know from PD that GT5 uses about 200.000 polys on their cars, which are almost equally divided over the interior and exterior. So it may well be that in photo mode you may be able to find some differences reflecting this.

On the other hand, from some of the comparisons between Forza 2 and Forza 3, I don't think all cars got as much polygon detail work on them, and the difference isn't always that big between the two. I think in game you never saw much more than 40.000 polygons per car in Forza 2 at best, and I'm not sure that will be very different this time - the biggest improvement by far has gone into the lighting.

How this relates to GT5 I'm not going to speculate on, if only because the post above directly comparing photo-mode shots from two different games is already pushing the forum policy on direct game comparisons, which are only allowed in separate threads.

Oh and here's a real one

Now by comparison, it's much harder to find pictures of a white one, but I did find some and they seem to point to a matte white one. The lack of reflections on the Forza 3 photo-mode shot certainly seems to suggest that it's the white matte version, which complicate comparisons even more.

 

[betan]

No self shadowing, reflections are off, AF is hit and miss. :|

(Also roses look like photoshopped.)

 

[Crossbar]

Oh and here's a real one

Rearview mirror is lacking selfshadowing! God fails!

 

[RudeCurve]

Lighting aside, you could see the difference between the two car models. One looks like a highly detaild static scale model while the other looks like a R/C model "shell". Those of you who are familiar with scale models will know what I mean.

As far as polys, didn't Turn10 say the cars have 10 times the poly resolution over FM2?

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

Rearview mirror is lacking selfshadowing! God fails!

At least there's pitch black darkness underneath the car, that's being realistic.

Lighting aside, you could see the difference between the two car models. One looks like a highly detaild static scale model while the other looks like a R/C model "shell". Those of you who are familiar with scale models will know what I mean.

As far as polys, didn't Turn10 say the cars have 10 times the poly resolution over FM2?

There's forza2 for you all, NOW GET TO IT!!

http://www.gamersyde.com/news_forza_motorsport_2_q_a_images-6198_en.html

lol, they don't look no lesser than 80 to 90,000 pollygons......maybe even 100.:smile:

http://www.gamersyde.com/pop_images_forza_motorsport_2-8026-18.html

http://www.gamersyde.com/pop_images_forza_motorsport_2-8026-14.html

http://www.gamersyde.com/pop_images_forza_motorsport_2-8026-8.html

10 times either one and you get, 800, 900, to 1,000,000, each car.

so in essence forza3's 8 cars is like racing with 20 to 25 of GT5's cars.

 

[Crossbar]

At least there's pitch black darkness underneath the car, that's being realistic.

Actually it´s not pitch black so god fails there as well. God sucks at what he is doing!

 

[nightshade]

10 times either one and you get, 800, 900, to 1,000,000, each car.so in essence forza3's 8 cars is like racing with 20 to 25 of GT5's cars.

And that is why I really doubt that its true, cause tbh thats a bit too high for actual poly count. [Tiling is different case altogether]